Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.

I have zero belief that Trump wants to fire the missiles. It's a deterrent and he knows that.

<snip>

You're talking about the guy who asked what good nukes were if we didn't use them.

__________________"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.

Why? He only said he wouldn't follow an illegal order, which is the credo in the armed services anyway. It appears Trump has the legal power to decide to use nuclear weapons, therefore Hyten would not be following an illegal order if Trump decided to use nuclear weapons.

And who decides what a legal order is, anyway? Does he have a list? Does he say, "Wait, I have to go and consult with my legal team?

You're right. Trump has the power.

And if he refuses, at that moment it doesn't even matter if the order is eventually deemed legal or not, because at that moment he is clearly guilty of refusing to obey a direct order.

His justification for doing that that gets adjudicated later. At that moment he is wrong, and someone else will take his place.

Until someone who does follow a direct order turns up.

__________________"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

And who decides what a legal order is, anyway? Does he have a list? Does he say, "Wait, I have to go and consult with my legal team?

You're right. Trump has the power.

And if he refuses, at that moment it doesn't even matter if the order is eventually deemed legal or not, because at that moment he is clearly guilty of refusing to obey a direct order.

His justification for doing that that gets adjudicated later. At that moment he is wrong, and someone else will take his place.

Until someone who does follow a direct order turns up.

This is exactly why we need specific rules of nuclear engagement which personnel would indeed be responsible for knowing. I don't think there's much hope of getting "no first strikes" on the list, but it's insane to leave that kind of decision up to one guy.

Some of the discrepancy is due to a downturn in business, but the rest is credited to an overheated imagination, according to Crain’s New York Business reporter Aaron Elstein, who examined the numbers.

In 2016 the Trump Organization reported nearly $9.5 billion in revenues. But recent public filings by the president indicate that the company actually earned only as much as $700 million that year, Crain’s said.

Crain’s this month bounced the Trump Organization from the No. 3 spot on its list of largest privately held New York City companies down to No. 40.

down an astonishing 92 places (to No. 248), in Forbes’ rankings of richest men in America.

Why? He only said he wouldn't follow an illegal order, which is the credo in the armed services anyway. It appears Trump has the legal power to decide to use nuclear weapons, therefore Hyten would not be following an illegal order if Trump decided to use nuclear weapons.

This is of course clearly FALSE. Trump has the command authority. That does not mean that any use of that authority is ipso facto legal. If Trump orders nuklear strikes on San Francisco and Boston, that would of course be illegal. Similarly, unilateral attacks on foreign powers are illegal. Genocide is illegal.

Hyten certainly implies that some conceivable orders by Trump can be illegal.

And who decides what a legal order is, anyway? Does he have a list? Does he say, "Wait, I have to go and consult with my legal team?

I am actually pretty certain that they have something like lists. At that strategic command level, it is highly important to understand the legal implications of big military decisions, and the military typically plans ahead of time for many conceivable future situations.

Originally Posted by quadraginta

You're right. Trump has the power.

And if he refuses, at that moment it doesn't even matter if the order is eventually deemed legal or not, because at that moment he is clearly guilty of refusing to obey a direct order.

A soldier, particularly an officer, can also be guilty of obeying orders: When the order is clearly illegal. You see, "I was following orders" was the standard defense of Nazi criminals. The Nuremberg trials established the principle that this is no defense, iow that orders must be disobeyed if it constitutes a war crime or a crime against humanity.

Originally Posted by quadraginta

His justification for doing that that gets adjudicated later. At that moment he is wrong, and someone else will take his place.

Until someone who does follow a direct order turns up.

This is of course a possibility. But I am not sure about the efficacy of new hirees in that particular job. The procedures to program and launch nukes require training. Trump's usual arse-lickers are incompetent. It's doubtful they'll actually manage to get any nuke out before the plan is spoiled and revolution removes Trump from office.

I am actually pretty certain that they have something like lists. At that strategic command level, it is highly important to understand the legal implications of big military decisions, and the military typically plans ahead of time for many conceivable future situations.

A soldier, particularly an officer, can also be guilty of obeying orders: When the order is clearly illegal. You see, "I was following orders" was the standard defense of Nazi criminals. The Nuremberg trials established the principle that this is no defense, iow that orders must be disobeyed if it constitutes a war crime or a crime against humanity.

This is of course a possibility. But I am not sure about the efficacy of new hirees in that particular job. The procedures to program and launch nukes require training. Trump's usual arse-lickers are incompetent. It's doubtful they'll actually manage to get any nuke out before the plan is spoiled and revolution removes Trump from office.

The crux: what makes a command lawful? Note that U.S. law may differ from Law of War.

Perhaps it does, but it may not (I am pretty sure it doesn't: International treaties that the USA is a party of are supreme law of the land as per the constitution; customary international law applies regardless of whether or how it is reflected in national law. Interpretations vary and change, of course. And enforceability is a whole nuther can-o-worms).

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.

This is what I've been curious about.
What was the end-game? Why relax the ban? What's the rationale?

I sure hope it just isn't that "My sons like to hunt elephants"...

Maybe that's all they can hit.

__________________Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.

Saying you have applicable knowledge of the topic just makes it worse.

Way back in the hazy past (6-7 years ago plus a memory dump). I've gotten a graduate degree in an entirely different subject since then and did only a year of Joint work since the JPME phase 1. I searched what I could online and the best I could find was that pricey reference.

__________________"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles

Way back in the hazy past (6-7 years ago plus a memory dump). I've gotten a graduate degree in an entirely different subject since then and did only a year of Joint work since the JPME phase 1. I searched what I could online and the best I could find was that pricey reference.

Sen. Jeff Flake(y), who is unelectable in the Great State of Arizona (quit race, anemic polls) was caught (purposely) on “mike” saying bad things about your favorite President. He’ll be a NO on tax cuts because his political career anyway is “toast.”

A few things.

1) The favorite president is Barack Obama, whose shoes you aren't fit to shine, and will never fill.

2) It's 'mic,' which is the thing you were wearing when you bragged about sexually assaulting women.

Shoplifting is a very big deal in China, as it should be (5-10 years in jail), but not to father LaVar. Should have gotten his son out during my next trip to China instead. China told them why they were released. Very ungrateful!

It's almost as if forgot he was the one who decided last week to allow the "horror show".

He probably did forget. He's not right in the head.

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

Hyten would be the one Trump would take the action unilaterally through. He is the next step in the execution of an order to fire.

Trump would need to fire him first, and have the next person in line take over.

Except that it does not touch on what is an illegal order. Is ordering the nuking of say any of Syria, Iran or North Korea considered an illegal order? Certainly ording conventional strikes is perfectly legal on all such targets.

Also there is the point that not all orders go through him, if at say 12:30 on a tuesday after a twitter exchange with Kim Jong Un he decides to launch nukes at north korea, he does not go through the commander of the nuclear forces, it would go through the current duty officer. As attacking north korea is a legal order is would be carried out.

Do posters here really think that there are people Trump could hire that would launch nukes at his whim without any forethought? You watch too much TV or something. This is ridiculous but it makes great news!

Trump doesn't need to hire them, the military has been making sure that orders originating from the president are never questioned for decades. The only checks on nuclear attacks are that the order comes from the president. Even asking about checks on the presidents authority to order nuclear attacks for any reason is enough to get to kicked out of the military.

This is of course clearly FALSE. Trump has the command authority. That does not mean that any use of that authority is ipso facto legal. If Trump orders nuklear strikes on San Francisco and Boston, that would of course be illegal. Similarly, unilateral attacks on foreign powers are illegal. Genocide is illegal.

So his ordering of air strikes against syria earlier this year would be illegal? You certainly seem to be the first person to seriously suggest that.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.